Hungary: An Uneasy Stability

  • George Schöpflin


The modern history of Hungary can be said to have begun with the 1867 Ausgleich (compromise) between the Hungarian gentry and Vienna, whereby the Hungarians were granted complete self-government. It was during the k.u.k. period — the abbreviation for königlich und kaiserlich (Royal and Imperial) used to denote the Austro-Hungarian system — that the beginnings of a modern economy were laid down and that the political system began to emerge from late feudalism. With the defeat of Austria-Hungary in 1918, the Hungarian state was stripped of three-fifths of its territory and over half its population, a sizeable portion of which was ethnically Hungarian.


Communist Party Political Culture Political Knowledge Political Experience Communist State 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Jenő Szűcs, ‘A nemzet historikuma és a történetszemlélet nemzeti látószöge’, in Nemzet és Történelem (Budapest, 1974) pp. 13–183. (All books in Hungarian cited here were published in Budapest, unless noted otherwise.)Google Scholar
  2. 3.
    Szekfű, op. cit.; Gyula Illyés, ‘Szakvizsgán — nacionalizmusbó1’, in Hajszálgyökerek (1971) pp. 440–59 and the interview with Illyés in Jelenkor, vol. 14, no. 12 (December 1971).Google Scholar
  3. 5.
    Péter Hanákő, Vázlatok a századelô magyar társadalmáról’, in Magyarország a Monarchiában (1975) pp. 343–404;Google Scholar
  4. Ferenc Erdei, ‘A magyar társadalom a két háború között’, Valdság vol. 19, no. 4 (April 1976) pp. 25–53.Google Scholar
  5. 9.
    István Bibó, ‘A magyar demokrácia válsága’, Harmadik Ut (London, 1960) pp. 32–79;Google Scholar
  6. István Vida, ‘A felszabadulás utáni átrétegeződés kérdéséhez’, Tiszatáj, vol. 28, no. 6 (June 1974) pp. 66–76.Google Scholar
  7. 13.
    Vilmos Juhász, ‘A forradalom követelései’, in Gyula Borbándi and József Molnár (eds), Tanulmányok a magyar forradalomrôl ( Munich, 1966 ) P. 459.Google Scholar
  8. 14.
    Ferenc A. Váli, Rift and Revolt in Hungary (Cambridge, Mass., 1961) p. 334 gives the details of the memorandum of the Csepel Metallurgical Works workers’ council, which called for the release of political prisoners, the withdrawal of Soviet forces, free elections, a multi-party system and national independence.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Mik1ós Molnár, Budapest 1956 (London, 1971) pp. 175–9, describes similar demands put forward by workers’ councils in the provinces.Google Scholar
  10. 15.
    Paul Ignotus, Hungary (London, 1972) ch. 14;Google Scholar
  11. William F. Robinson, The Pattern of Reform in Hungary: a Political, Economic and Cultural Analysis (New York, 1973) pt 1.Google Scholar
  12. 24.
    Jenő Faragó, ‘Magasabbrendű kollektivizmus’, Népszabadság 11 February 1973.Google Scholar
  13. 25.
    Lajos Mesterházi, ‘Az új ember jegyében’, Új Irás vol. 13, no. 2 (February 1973) PP. 78–93.Google Scholar
  14. 34.
    Rudolf Tőkés, ‘Hungarian Intellectuals’ reaction to the invasion of Czechoslovakia’, in E. J. Czerwinski and Jaroslaw Piekalkiewicz (eds), The Soviet Invasion of Czechoslovakia: Its Effects on Eastern Europe (New York, 1972 ) p. 148.Google Scholar
  15. 44.
    See Tamás Aczél and Tibor Méray, Tisztitó Vihar (London, 1961). This is the Hungarian-language edition of The Revolt of the Mind (New York, 1959).Google Scholar
  16. 48.
    Vilmos Faragó, ‘Az izlésoll6 két szárnya’, Elet és Irodalom, 7 August 1971.Google Scholar
  17. 5o.
    Tibor Gyurkovics, ‘Ami az íróknak hianyzik’, Elet és Irodalom, 1 January 1972.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© George Schöpflin 1979

Authors and Affiliations

  • George Schöpflin

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations